gtafandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:IanBrettCooper
Welcome There are many possibilities of who killed who. Sure, Trevor could have killed both of them, but that's "COULD HAVE", not "did". The two people with weapons could have killed each other. Floyd could have killed Debra and then picked up her gun and shot himself. Debra could have shot Floyd and then Trevor could have killed her. To say that Trevor killed both of them is to suggest a scenario that is not shown by the game - it's speculation, and a Wiki page shouldn't include speculation. IanBrettCooper (talk) 16:32, August 11, 2015 (UTC) Hang Ten I don't know what makes you think he didn't do that. I mean, if it wasn't Trevor, who was it then? And why he got out of the apartment alive and full of blood? It's way too obvious that he killed both of them. AndreEagle17 16:24, August 11, 2015 (UTC) :On top of this, don't forget that Trevor have a very bad temper, and if I'm not wrong, he was quite pissed off before the cutscene ends... MC (MyComputer) 16:30, August 11, 2015 (UTC) :: You talk about speculation but you're the only user creating speculations here. Your points makes no sense at all, if we are to say that, we could say that Devin Weston could have survived in The Third Way. Refrain from adding such things to articles from now. AndreEagle17 16:34, August 11, 2015 (UTC) ::: Where does the game show that Trevor killed anyone in that condo? I've played through this scene twice and it shows nothing of the kind. The game leaves what happens in that condo a mystery. But hey, if you want the Wiki to give misleading information, that's your prerogative I guess. IanBrettCooper (talk) 16:41, August 11, 2015 (UTC) Your information is much more misleading than any other fan-fic website. I don't know how a psychopath like Trevor can avoid killing two people threatening him, it's not speculation, your "info" is the speculation here, don't think you're above anyone in this wiki and if you want to ask Rockstar who killed Debra and Floyd, go ahead, whatever inflates your boat. AndreEagle17 16:44, August 11, 2015 (UTC) : So let me get this straight: although there's no proof whatsoever that Trevor killed anyone in that condo, your view is that Trevor must have done it, and that's "not speculation" even though there is no evidence beyond the fact that Trevor is a psycho. Meanwhile my correction, showing that we don't know who killed who in there, is "speculation" just because Trevor is a psycho. : Sure, he's a psycho, but psychos don't have to kill anyone. He doesn't kill Michael, and Michael gives him much more reason. More to the point, he's never shown killing Debra or Floyd, so when the Wiki says he definitely did, the Wiki is misleading. : But hey, what do I know. I mean, all I demand is that Wikis present actual facts, and not opinions. IanBrettCooper (talk) 17:08, August 11, 2015 (UTC) : Yeah, keep with that thinking and wikis will be like "it's speculation to say that cars use gasoline as fuel" and "bullets are made of steel", if this is a speculation to you, everything is a speculation in this wiki then! How can Trevor go inside and apartment and only watch two people killing themselves? And the distance that Debra was from Floyd would prevent him to stab her, it is almost impossible to prove that you're right, as for Trevor, Debra could have shot Floyd and Trevor had a knife and killed her, but all the possibilities are just as unlikely as saying that Devin Weston survived from The Third Way, my position is; your argument is still invalid considering Rockstar's development, if my argument is not valid, yours is much less valid. AndreEagle17 18:50, August 11, 2015 (UTC) : Do you even know what evidence is? Do you know what speculation is? Speculation is assuming stuff that isn't in evidence, such as assuming that someone killed someone else when all you have to go on is a dead body and blood on the shirt of the guy who left the dead person's apartment. No court would be able to convict Trevor on such flimsy evidence even if he were guilty, yet you're happy to have a Wikipedia page assert that he definitely killed two people, neither of whom you saw getting killed. I mean, I just hope you're never on a jury. This is a Wiki page - it should present facts, not assumptions. But hey, you go with what suits you, I guess. This is why Wikis are laughed at as being full of garbage. IanBrettCooper (talk) 20:19, August 11, 2015 (UTC) :: So, are you saying that is unknown what really happened in Hang Ten and the fact that Trevor killed Floyd and Debra is certainly false? Sure, say that to all other players that completed the GTA V storyline. Trevor surely killed Floyd and Debra because the following evidences are clear: #He was pissed off at the cutscene. #Later, Trevor appears covered in blood. #He tries to not let Wade to see what's really going on (saying that blood is syrup, for example). :: What remains unknown is how. But come on. What other possibilities would be? Being just a witness? :: And saying that the Wiki should stick onto verified facts and not into speculations is because, from my perspective, many facts have been altered over the course of time (such vehicle class versus actual body style or vehicle types), but cutscenes remains unchanged or slighty changed in such conditions. That's the idea. :: And if you don't care, Fine, but blaming in that way to the Wiki and what is correct and is incorrect, along with the edit warring, just makes everything worse. [[User:Camilo Flores|'SWAT Cam F']] Dispatch 00:03, August 12, 2015 (UTC) :::I do care. That's why I changed it. I care about the truth, and I want the Wiki to reflect what the game says and more importantly in this case, what it leaves open to interpretation. And I never started an edit war - all I did was fix an erroneous entry, then I reverted an attempt at sabotage - once only. Then I went to the forums to seek help in dealing with the saboteurs. ::: As for your points: ::: 1. This is not evidence. They were all pissed off. It doesn't prove anyone killed anyone. ::: 2. Blood tends to splash around when people are murdered. This is circumstantial evidence - it proves he was there (which we already knew) - it doesn't prove he killed anyone. ::: 3. He may have been trying to protect Wade's feelings. ::: These points are not hard "evidence" and we need hard evidence before we start making claims on the Wiki of who killed who. We never see who killed who, and basically anyone could have done it. Double murder, murder-suicide, double suicide - all are possible. In fact, when you look at who had the weapons, it's actually less likely that Trevor did it. Still, I think he did, but that's not the point - my opinion is irrelevant. We need facts. ::: What other possibilities could there be? Lots. And that's the whole point. You can't just choose what you believe might be true. The Wiki needs more than that. ::: And I'm not claiming that Trevor didn't do it - not at all. On the contrary, I think he did kill both of them. But the only reasonable attitude for the Wiki is that of agnosticism - we just don't know what happened in that condo. ::: Trevor is undoubtedly capable of double murder even when he's unarmed and facing two armed opponents. However, what he's capable of is beside the point. The problem, from the standpoint of the Wiki, is that the Wiki needs to tell what actually is certain to have happened, not what we think happened. A Wiki cannot be governed by gut instinct or hunches - it needs to be clear and definitely true, and there is only vague innuendo in this scene. By all means go with your own feelings for your game, but the whole point of the scene is that it's left to the player's imagination - EVERY player's imagination, not just those who agree with you and me. When the Wiki puts forward one possible explanation as fact, it denies the player's ability to interpret. In making the positive claim that Trevor killed Debra and Floyd, it betrays the scene, the writers, other players, and to some extent the game itself. IanBrettCooper (talk) 00:15, August 12, 2015 (UTC) : Okay. Afer seeing the edits, I see your point of the idea of "no speculation" and what "was wrong" in the first time, so I think you did a clear point. But look, if the edits are reverted, try to avoid edit warring and discuss it on the talk page or on the user's talk page. It's less problematic than that. [[User:Camilo Flores|'SWAT Cam F']] Dispatch 00:50, August 12, 2015 (UTC) :: Like I said, I didn't start an edit war. The administrator did. And heck, I didn't even know there was such a thing as an "edit war" before today - I've never even seen this kind of thing before on Wikia (I have seen similar stuff on Wikipedia, but I naively thought that a wiki of a game would be different - and it always has been in my experience before). I thought people just contributed and the info got better. I guess I've learned a thing or two about Wikia - and after being given a warning for violating policy, when all I did was try to improve the site, I'll certainly think twice before trying to improve the site in future. I have better things to do than spend hours on this nonsense. :( . IanBrettCooper (talk) 00:52, August 12, 2015 (UTC) :: The bottom line is that Trevor comes out, and Debra and Floyd are dead. We won't know who killed who unless it is confirmed by Rockstar. Drop it, or you will be blocked. You have already been warned. Leo68 (talk) 03:02, August 12, 2015 (UTC) ::: That was my whole point. I have dropped it, because the administrators have upheld my changes. No need to threaten me with a block. Everyone should drop it, as the matter is settled. IanBrettCooper (talk) 11:08, August 12, 2015 (UTC) RE: Edit war With regard to your warning, you can't remove it but if you believe it to be issued unjustly you can request for an admin or bureaucrat to strike it through. I've been on the sidelines in this debate but have been keeping an eye on it, and I'll strike it through as I believe it was issued unjustly. Sam Talk 16:51, August 12, 2015 (UTC) :Just seen the warning and part of it was for edit warring, so that part has to remain I'm afraid. However, having seen the discussions on the Hang Ten page the conversations managed to stay civil for the most part. So I backtrack and say I can't fully strike through the warning, but it shouldn't have too many repercussions further down the line. Sam Talk 16:56, August 12, 2015 (UTC) I think you didn't deserve the warning. You undid two edits but removing the speculation was right, and like Sam says, you stayed civil. I support the idea of striking through the warning. DocVinewood (talk) 17:05, August 12, 2015 (UTC) :Thanks for the second opinion Doc. I'll strike it through. Sam Talk 17:09, August 12, 2015 (UTC) ::Thanks guys. IanBrettCooper (talk) 17:50, August 12, 2015 (UTC)